Bullinghope Briefing

Bloor's Planning Statement sets out their proposals for planning obligations, based on the Council's draft new SPD on POs. They are offering £40k for libraries, £40k for Belmont community centre, and £195k for off-site sports provision. They are proposing nil contribution to education because the relevant school capacity is already adequate. There is no indication whether any of this has already been discussed with officers.

They are also proposing an unspecified contribution to the RAR with nil affordable housing, in line with the UDP policy that proposes this "..to enable and ensure construction of the RAR.." Since the Council have so far refused to provide information on the actual cost of the road and how it was funded, it is impossible to know what figure might be justified. In any event, since the road is almost finished and paid for, a Bloor contribution is obviously not now needed to "enable" the road to be built. Affordable housing should be required instead.

Transport Assessment dated April 2008 from Halcrow. This states that Hoarwithy Rd will not be used for traffic because it would connect to the A49 at the Holme Lacy junction and the Highways Agency would require this to be upgraded to allow for projected growth for the next 15 years - which is too expensive for Bloor. Instead all traffic will use Bullingham Lane. The latter's access to the A49 is already being upgraded for the Bradbury Lines development. At the railway bridge over Bullingham Lane alternating one-way movements, controlled by traffic lights, would be introduced.

The real issue seems to be capacity on the A49. The report mentions at one point that this is already 100% saturated during peak hours, but then goes on to state that it can cope with the extra Bullingham Lane traffic - even though this would increase by over 15% beteen the Lane and Holme Lacy junctions, and still, I think, some 10% towards the Asda roundabout. The argument seems to be that it would increase tailbacks but not to the extent of causing gridlock. However, it is all the usual jargon and statistics and really needs a traffic expert to be commissioned to analyse the report and pinpoint and define any weaknesses.

The other big point is that there is NO extra public transport provision (no mention now of a hopper bus through the site) - just a pair of extra bus stops for the existing 79 on Hoarwithy Rd, and a promise that the service frequency of the 79 will reviewed. There are lots of cycling and pedestrian routes to the centre and to Rotherwas, but this is not much use to the elderly etc. This really does go against Govt and council policy about providing good public transport links and switching people from cars to buses. This must add to the traffic figures produced by Halcrow but it would need the traffic expert to check this out.

Flood Risk Assessment by Halcrow dated May 2007. This states that all the houses will be above the 1-in-100-year+20% flood level and the Environment Agency appear to be satisfied. I know that some have queried the tendency of the site to flood, but I do not know enough about this to be able to judge the report against it. Bear in mind that the Bloor houses are mainly on higher ground and the lowest point, near the Hoarwithy rail bridge, is not being built on - instead it is where the big attenuation pond is being placed.

As far as design is concerned, Bloor propose that all homes will be built to Level 3 of the Govt's new Code for Sustainable Homes. The Council now seem to be relying on this code rather than producing their own standards, as originally intended in the UDP. There are several other documents on biodiversity, landscape, heritage, etc which others with special knowledge of these should probably have a look at. I did however notice the statement on the landscape impact of the site. In effect it says that because of its low-lying location, surrounded by gentle slopes to west and south, the visual impact is fairly localised. The exception is Dinedor Hill from which it will be very visible, but it points out that this view has already been compromised by the RAR which distracts the eye from the impact of the housing!